In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:25:23 +0000
<1707026.xqpIYDd1Pg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Elderly woman prohibiting from photographing empty swimming pool "to prevent
> paedophilia"
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | An 82-year-old woman in Southampton, UK was told she couldn't take photos of
> | an empty wading pool because she might be a paedophile. Because, you know,
> | anything that children touch regularly becomes part of their souls, and if a
> | paedophile looks at those objects, it's just like sexually assaulting a
> | child.
> `----
>
> http://www.boingboing.net/2008/07/25/elderly-woman-prohib.html
Apparently the pool has also drained all sense out of
its owners/administrators...
>
> And later they use paedophiles to shut down
> entire big blocks of the Internet
> (see links at the bottom).
>
> Here's another demonstration of the problem with national ID:
>
> OpenID gets the third degree at OSCON
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The panel specifically solicited comments from site owners who had chosen not
> | to implement OpenID -- including Leah Culver of Pownce, who evoked laughs and
> | a brief round of applause when she recalled that OpenID was originally
> | designed to solve the problem of registering to leave blog comments. For that
> | task, she suggested, it might not be worth the hassle. "Is it really so
> | fucking onerous to remember your password?"
> `----
>
> http://www.linux.com/feature/142730
>
>
> Days ago:
>
> Court Strikes Down Internet Censorship Law
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | We just received word today that the Third Circuit struck down a federal
> | Internet censorship law as unconstitutional. The law, called the Child Online
> | Protection Act, imposed civil and criminal penalties on those who
> | place ?harmful to minors? material on the Web. Under this law, no adult, no
> | matter how mature or responsible, would have been allowed to see material
> | that is deemed unfit for a child. The law would have forced vast swaths of
> | constitutionally protected speech off of the Web.
> `---- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> http://blog.aclu.org/2008/07/22/court-strikes-down-internet-censorship-law/
>
This sounds more like a technical glitch, though one does
wonder as to whether it can be worked around (or if we'd
even want to).
>
> New York threatens Comcast with anti-porn suit
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | With this ongoing campaign, Cuomo has brought himself reams of publicity. But
> | in the long run, his grandstanding has likely buried more legitimate free
> | speech than child pornography. The likes of AT&T and Time Warner used their
> | Cuomo agreements as an excuse to vaporize large swaths of Usenet where New
> | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> | York hasn't found "sexually lewd photos featuring prepubescent children." And
> | though the AG has successfully choked access to roughly 88 newsgroups that do
> | contain child porn, you can bet the pornographers will simply move elsewhere.
> `---- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/22/cuomo_threatens_comcast_with_lawsuit/
>
>
> US Court Strikes Down COPA, Again
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A U.S. appeals court has for the third time struck down a law intended to
> | keep Web sites with sexually oriented themes away from children, with judges
> | saying the law is a vague and overly broad attack on free speech.
> `---- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/148762/us_court_strikes_down_copa_again.html
>
>
> Comcast bows to child porn pressure
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Cuomo is backing a "code of conduct" that requires ISPs to block web sites
> | and newsgroups thought to be fiddling about with child pornography.
> `----
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/07/22/comcast-bows-child-porn
>
It's part of the law, until struck down. It is currently
illegal to possess or transmit such material. See, for
instance, 2251(d)(1) of the USC. [Disclaimer: IANAL.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002251----000-.html
I don't know regarding case law for ISPs (does one blame
the pipe for carrying poison?) but clearly Comcast is not
in the wrong, though I'm not sure they're in the right,
either.
>
> Recent:
>
> Cable giants bullied into new child porn censorship deal
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The group will provide each cable company with a list of Web site addresses
> | that they believe contain child porn.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | It is unclear what, if any, notification cable customers will receive before
> | their Web sites are deleted, or what legal rights they will have to appeal
> | the classification of their content as illegal child pornography.
> |
> | The memo of understanding states that the private group will provide cable
> | companies with a list of kiddie porn URLs, that "in NCMEC's good faith"
> | appears to meet the federal definition of child pornography.
> `----
>
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-9994159-46.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
>
>
> Animal Rights Activists Forced to Hand Over Encryption Keys
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | If you remember, this was sold to the public as essential for fighting
> | terrorism. It's already being misused.
> `----
>
> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/animal_rights_a.html
>
Can't be too careful. They might be harboring al Qaeda
in Pakistan as they campaign for animal rights in the US,
or something. Or maybe it's little green men from Mars.
I'd have to look.
>
> The war on photographers - you're all al Qaeda suspects now
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/23/police_photographer_stops/
>
To be fair, the police are obligated to enforce the law;
if they see a suspicious activity, they may take steps
to prevent its recurrence or continuance. Presumably,
in this case, they thought he might be reconnoitering,
or photographing young children without their consent
(though for some reason they neglected to mention this at
the time they confiscated his film).
This is definitely pushing it, though -- and how is
photographing a crowd against the law? Was the guy
in Ipswitch stalking Letitia Dean? Or just wanted
a snap for his album and saw a famous person performing
an interesting civic act -- lighting the communal
Christmas tree? (What would happen in Washington DC
to someone photographing George W. Bush?)
Can't be too careful, I guess. A picture of Letitia
Dean might be a codeword/message for an Al Qaeda cell
somewhere in London, which would activate once this poor
guy gets on the Tube (if he instead drives his car, walks,
or uses a Segway, it means something else) and meets after
midnight somewhere in a back alley with a guy wearing a
gray cloak to turn over his memory card and the code word
"splunge", which, roughly translated, means "blow up the
clock tower in the Palace of Westminster [aka 'Big Ben']
after stealing the crown jewels".
Had he used the code word "flange", the crown jewels would
be stolen first. Order is important.
Had he used the code word "cringe", they'd somehow have
to coordinate the theft of the Blarney Stone in Ireland
with the stealing of the crown jewels.
Had he used the code word "mange", they'd have had to
travel to Fort Knox in the US first. (They'd have to
plan for these sorts of contingencies, I'd think.)
Had the guy worn a red cloak, the photographer would
have instead have to submit a picture of Miley Cyrus,
instead, to verify his identity. A green cloak would
require a picture of Halle Berry; a blue cloak, Karen
Carpenter (which would be a bit of a challenge as she
died of anorexia, and the authorities generally frown
upon unauthorized exhumantions). A black cloak means
he's about to get shot. A blue coat and hat means he's
about to get arrested, especially if accompanied with a
shiny badge and a truncheon. A gray suit means he's in
the wrong alley and is about to get mugged...
>
> Bavaria sanctions police spyware
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Bavaria has become the first German state to approve laws that allow police
> | to plant spyware on the PCs of terror suspects.
> `----
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/07/bavaria_police_spyware_plan/
>
"Put your cam on my shoulder....
trigger lock my arms [*]....bay-bee...."
(Sorry.)
>
> Warning over phone calls database
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A central database holding details of everyone's phone calls and emails could
> | be a "step too far for the British way of life", ministers have been warned.
> `----
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7507627.stm
>
Or it might not be far enough. A lot of phone calls
can be done through Skype, for instance. Can't be
too careful...
>
> US civil rights activists protest new wiretapping law
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed suit against the US
> | government to protest the new Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
> | recently passed by Congress. The civil rights organisation believes that the
> | far-reaching authority granted by the Act, which has now been signed by
> | George W. Bush, is unconstitutional.
> `----
>
> http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/110904/from/rss09
[*] the ones that fire, not the ones that caress.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
Windows. The choice of a bunch of people who like very weird behavior on
a regular basis, random crashes, and "extend, embrace, and extinguish".
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
|
|
